New Delhi: A youth has been sentenced to ten years in jail by a Delhi court for kidnapping a minor girl and repeatedly raping her after administering some stupefying substance to her with food.
The court also imposed a fine of Rs 25,000 on 23-year-old convict Surender, who had kidnapped the minor girl from Delhi in 2009 and took her to his village in Uttar Pradesh, where he raped her after making her eat some snacks containing intoxicating substance.
"I am of considered opinion that the prosecution has categorically proved beyond shadows of all reasonable doubts that victim, a minor girl of about 14 years, was kidnapped by accused Surender after having been made to eat snacks containing some stupefying intoxicating substance...." said Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Mahesh Chander Gupta.
The prosecution case dated back to March 8, 2009, when the victim`s mother, residing in Siraspur village here on rent and working with her daughter in a food grain godown, reported to the police that her daughter had gone missing.
She said her daughter had gone for work, but when she reached the gowdown for work after her, she did not find her there and there was no trace of her.
The girl was spotted along with Surender at a bus stand on March 13, 2009 and the duo were apprehended by police.
During the trial, Surender claimed innocence, saying the girl loved him and had eloped with him and claimed that he was falsely implicated in the case.
The police told the court that Surender had kidnapped the
minor girl and had then taken her to his village in Uttar Pradesh where he repeatedly raped her after administering her some intoxication or drug.
The girl, in her testimony to the court, also supported the the prosecution`s story and denied that her parents had tutored her to depose against Surender.
She also denied that she was having any affair with him.
The court convicted Surender relying on the girl`s testimony and the evidence brought on record by the police.
The judge dismissed Surender`s claim that he was falsely implicated saying, "Further there is no iota of evidence or even a suggestion that the accused (Surender) has been falsely implicated because of animosity."